9 out of 10 monkeys believe they are not behind glass

Via BoingBoing

DB Fletcher’s Capstan Tables are amazing, expanding round dinner-tables. When you spin them by the outer edges, they separate into sseveral pie-shaped radial slices, revealing more slives beneath that rise up to make a seamless, much larger surface. Spin the table-edge the other way and the table shrinks back again. The videos have to be seen to be believed.

Watch the videos!

Food for thought: (from wikipedia)

Adolf Hitler was brought up in his family’s religion by his Roman Catholic parents, but as a school boy he began to reject the Church and Catholicism. After he had left home, he never attended Mass or received the Sacraments. However, he was never excommunicated, so he could be considered a Catholic in good standinguntil his death by suicide. This is significant when one reads claims that he persecuted Catholics, as well as Jews. If he had done so, he would have been excommunicated, and the entire nation could have been placed under interdict. This never happened.

In later life, Hitler’s religious beliefs present a discrepant picture: In public statements, he frequently spoke positively about the Christian heritage of German culture and belief in Christ. Hitler’s private statements, reported by his intimates, are more mixed, showing Hitler as a religious but also anti-Christian man. However, in contrast to other Nazi leaders, Hitler did not adhere to esoteric ideas, occultism, or neo-paganism, and ridiculed such beliefs in his book Mein Kampf. Rather, Hitler advocated a “Positive Christianity”, a belief system purged from what he objected to in traditional Christianity, and reinvented Jesus as a fighter against the Jews.

Hitler believed in a Social Darwinist struggle for survival between the different races, among which the “Aryan race” was supposed to be the torchbearers of civilization and the Jews as enemies of all civilization. Whether his anti-semitism was influenced by older Christian ideas remains disputed. Hitler also strongly believed that “Providence” was guiding him in this fight.

Among Christian denominations, Hitler favoured Protestantism, which was more open to such reinterpretations, but at the same time imitated some elements of Catholic church organization, liturgy, and phraseology in his politics.

Any other leaders come to mind that have also claimed that ““Providence” was guiding him in this fight“?

Hmmmmm. Weird. I swear I heard Bush Jr. say that too. Not that Dubya is Hitler or anything.

He sure isn’t as good of a speaker as Hitler. That is for damn sure. Clinton is closer in that regard.

Sometimes contrasting two people from different circumstances and different times leads to insights for both of those being contrasted. Compare Clinton to FDR, or Bush Jr. to Hitler, or even Bush Jr. to Lincoln. What kind of things do you find?

History repeating itself? Interesting insights into the human condition? What drives us as a species into conflict resulting in legalized murder?

It sparks the imagination.

There are a couple things that I am scared of to death in this world. Deep water and forces larger than me. I guess they can almost be considered the same thing, so forces larger than me has to take the cake. Deep water is a big force and when you can’t see the bottom, I do believe that is the perfect time to panic.

The force-larger-than-me that scares me the most is the consensus of a group. When the consensus is wrong, horribly horribly wrong, or has been twisted by a very clever and cunning member of that group, I am always very worried. More often than not, I happen to be the member of the group that is in opposition to the popular opinion. If there are stormtroopers around, I am usually the rebellion sympathizer without a blaster or a plan.

This fear, be default, makes talking politics with my family a taboo subject. A veritable minefield of avoided topics which inevitably lead to quiet inquiries about the weather. My family is very politically minded, which is fine by me, as someone in this world should be politically minded. It is just that I am afraid that they are too focused on the existing system to understand the folly of the “great consensus”. The gathering of so many people on a subject that in the end, the lowest common denominator is what makes the choice.

Give America a small set of choices and the retards will be the ones that vote the most and make it appear the system actually works, if you know what I mean. But when the politicians with the most money can brainwash enough retards to vote enough times, democracy is not working. That is not representation. That is just scary in my opinion. Democracy is great, don’t get me wrong. I think the USA is the best country in almost every respect that has ever existed. Rome be damned.

But. (There had to be a but.)

Much like any system, governments require “corrections” every once in a while. The founding fathers understood this and hoped to make a system of checks and balances that would slowly or constantly enforce those changes. But the question needs to be asked if those corrections are occurring. The recent Democrat takeover would lead most people to believe that yes, things are indeed changing. But as most of us know, it really isn’t. Democrats and Republicans all belong to the same country clubs. They all have the same stock portfolios and they all believe in the same thing. What makes it seem like they don’t is that they split hairs over silly things. Things to divert attention, things to capture thought, things to shift away from the horrible fact that the US is slowly rotting from within. Things like who is sleeping with who’s intern and who voted for that war thing and who can be blamed for the budget overruns.

And my answer to all that?

Pick up a mirror.

Interviewing people is one of the most uncomfortable social interactions that I can think of, short of a funeral or a bad date. (I guess interviews and bad dates are the exact same thing, actually. “First dates are interviews, Gwen.” – Van Wilder)

The interviewee is nervous and constantly double guessing answers and the questions asked, whilst the interviewer is unsure of the right questions to ask while measuring the stress response of the interviewee. Makes for an unusual interaction of flight versus fight nervous responses on both sides.

The interviewee wants an opportunity to prove themselves and validate their existence to a fellow human being. The interviewer is wondering what is for lunch while counting the number of blinks the interviewee is making during their responses to the questions. And I had to pee. Can’t forget that.

I thought I was going to explode. Note to self: Do not drink coffee before an interview.

I pity HR people. You either really have to enjoy it or be just a little stupid.

Like crazy stupid to force yourself to run through the same paces every single time a job is posted or you have to interview someone. I bet that behind Guidance Counselors, HR folks have the highest rate of blowing their noggins off. With a nailgun. Three times. Because the first and second time they biffed it.

That is dedication.

Me? I am just not cut out for that rot. Hiring and Firing is just not my thing. Too exhausting.

And I generally have to pee.

Damn you coffee, damn you and your deliciousness!